So the general consensus I've found so far is that armour is as about as useful as wearing a soggy wet paper bag ... which is unfortunate because it feels odd not to deck my leader and the odd hero in some armour because they are extra important ... so I considered this for a houserule and was curious if it would be overpowered or still render armour useless?

All body armour gains an extra +1 save.

Shield 6+Light Armour 5+Heavy Armour 4+Gromril Armour 3+etc

Which also bought a new piece of equipment to mind.

LeathersProvides a 6+ save by itself, cannot be worn with other body armour. If the warrior wearing it is taken out of action (and they survive without being robbed) than roll a D6, on a 4 or more the leathers survive, otherwise they have been ruined and must be discarded.

8 Gold Coins

So what do you think of these? What are some of you guys houserules to make armour more desirable?

I like them, they seem fair. The only problem is that it's already quite hard to get enemies OOA ; the length of the game might stretch somewhat longer with the new armour rules – still I agree that the armour is hardly worth its cost.

I still think this is intentional. Like Popmouth said the game would take longer for a start. Also some things in Mordheim are not costed by howgood they are, but how rare or expensive they were in the Warhammer World at the time of the comet. Handguns for example: I don't know anyone who chooses handguns over crossbows other than for fluff reasons! Same with armour in my book.

Well a few others I've seen include having body armour giving you a 'save againt serious injury' after battles ... which looks interesting, does that help it be alittle more worthwhile? As I can't see it slowing the game down as it happens after game.

Well a few others I've seen include having body armour giving you a 'save againt serious injury' after battles

That sounds like a really good idea actually.

WarbossKurgan wrote:

Also some things in Mordheim are not costed by howgood they are, but how rare or expensive they were in the Warhammer World at the time of the comet.

That's true, and it's a horrible idea. Since it's applied inconsistently, it just makes some items overpowered (slings) and others useless (handguns). I can't imagine why anyone ever thought it was good game design.

The problem is that somewhere in the decision making process the line between GC being use as points in a miniature skirmish game and being used as money in a role playing game got blurred. Where the game fails is that it didn't commit fully to the GC as points option.

Handguns are doubly handicapped - firing every other turn in addition to being too expensive. Crossbows every time!

But I still don't think things need to be "fixed" though, I like the imbalances as it takes away a little of the competative nature of Mordheim. It's not about winning - it's the story that matters.

If you are worried about game-balance and trying to beat your opponent and getting the most efficient killer warband in GC-for-results terms, then I'm sorry but you are playing Mordheim WRONG!

So what if armour is over priced? So what if handguns are a bad choice? Don't use them if you don't like it. Pick other options... OR use them anyway and accept that they are the less useful but more fluffy options for your warband.

Edit:Hmmm.. Maybe I shouldn't get involved in these conversations - I'm not really being very helpful! Sorry everyone! Carry on...

Last edited by WarbossKurgan on Thu 22 Oct 2009 - 8:30; edited 1 time in total

Dubstyles and I added fluff and game balance at once...Shields and a one handed weapon give you a +2 armor save, and stacked with armor it is worth it. This makes for a more diverse warband, and keeps you from arming everyone the same way, or with the same cheap 2 club combo.

On a side note, we also made handguns a bit more powerful and added some other items for them. (Like hunting arrows for guns, I think it called it spiral shells or something...maybe hollow slugs..can't remember)

This makes being a fluffy warband fun and useful. And it puts handguns at a slightly better bang for the cost..Cause c'mon, it's a GUN with an EXPLOSION propelling a slug forward at high speed...it SHOULD do a bit more damage than a crossbow, and we made a few rules for it, playtested it, and it works nice..if you want the rules I am sure we can dig em up for you.

We have four equipment-related house rules to balance the equipment a bit better:

1. As Figgy says, giving +1 armour save for a "hand weapon" (any weapon that could be used with another weapon - not spears, morning stars, etc.) and shield is immensely helpful.2. Warriors attacking with two weapons suffer a -1 to hit penalty that may be negated by learning the "Ambidextrous" house-ruled combat skill.3. Wounds from handguns and longrifles get +1 on the injury roll to represent their extra punch (because pistol weapons are smaller this does NOT apply to them).4. Any missile weapon that is capable of firing more than one shot (e.g., slings) suffers a -1 to hit penalty for doing so.

I've found that those four rules make all the difference in balancing out equipment while keeping armour in the "expensive and prestigious" position that the background warrants.

EDIT: I should point out that Dramatis Personae that come equipped with two hand weapons count as having the Ambidextrous skill and that weapons that come in pairs (Skaven climbing claws) don't suffer this penalty.

Handguns are doubly handicapped - firing every other turn in addition to being too expensive. Crossbows every time!

But I still don't think things need to be "fixed" though, I like the imbalances as it takes away a little of the competative nature of Mordheim. It's not about winning - it's the story that matters.

If you are worried about game-balance and trying to beat your opponent and getting the most efficient killer warband in GC-for-results terms, then I'm sorry but you are playing Mordheim WRONG!

So what if armour is over priced? So what if handguns are a bad choice? Don't use them if you don't like it. Pick other options... OR use them anyway and accept that they are the less useful but more fluffy options for your warband.

Edit:Hmmm.. Maybe I shouldn't get involved in these conversations - I'm not really being very helpful! Sorry everyone! Carry on...

Oh ok ... its less I want to have the most 'killer warband' Warboss than I really don't like what I've seen in some places where fluff is sacrificed for the ultimate jello mold warband of 15 dudes with two clubs, a bow and a helmet because the rest of the equipment is all pants ... I kind of wanna have spears and halberds and handguns and not have the guy across the table snickering "Noob" as he wipes the floor with me.

I suppose the trick is to find people who are more fluffy than beardy to play with

I really like the idea of handguns having a bonus to the injury table. That makes enormous sense fluffwise.

JAFisher44 wrote:

The problem is that somewhere in the decision making process the line between GC being use as points in a miniature skirmish game and being used as money in a role playing game got blurred. Where the game fails is that it didn't commit fully to the GC as points option.

That's right. It's the inconsistency that really drives me up the wall.

If they want slings to be cheap, that's fine. But they can't have them being just as effective as something that costs five times as much. It's crazy, and it discourages variety and roleplaying.

If equipment isn't costed according to its true value, then the game is punishing you for taking it. It's pushing you towards powergaming!

I really don't think spears and morningstars shouldn't get the extra armor save when combined with a spear. I know it's how WFB does it and those weapons are more unwieldy and such, but I feel like both of those weapons kind of need the help; neither is worth their price as is.

I really don't think spears and morningstars shouldn't get the extra armor save when combined with a spear. I know it's how WFB does it and those weapons are more unwieldy and such, but I feel like both of those weapons kind of need the help; neither is worth their price as is.

After posting in this thread I discovered the "Dual Wield Thread" sticky and felt like a bit of an idiot because it debates most of the current equipment rules...

I will, however, defend the choice to leave morning stars and spears out by saying that the thing that makes them not worth their cost is the fact that two weapons tend to blow them out of the water. When you penalize warriors for using two weapons, other items become more useful. +1 A at the cost of -1 to hit, or 5+ save with no attack bonus, or 6+ save/parry with +1 strength or striking first... it becomes a bit more difficult to choose even without including the fact that you'll have more armour saves to deal with and hence will actually find axes that much more useful. I find it balanced when you take all the changes into consideration.

Handguns are doubly handicapped - firing every other turn in addition to being too expensive. Crossbows every time!

But I still don't think things need to be "fixed" though, I like the imbalances as it takes away a little of the competative nature of Mordheim. It's not about winning - it's the story that matters.

If you are worried about game-balance and trying to beat your opponent and getting the most efficient killer warband in GC-for-results terms, then I'm sorry but you are playing Mordheim WRONG!

So what if armour is over priced? So what if handguns are a bad choice? Don't use them if you don't like it. Pick other options... OR use them anyway and accept that they are the less useful but more fluffy options for your warband.

Edit:Hmmm.. Maybe I shouldn't get involved in these conversations - I'm not really being very helpful! Sorry everyone! Carry on...

My problem is that "the story" isn't any fun when "the story" is about how my warband got its ass handed to it because all its strengths are based around overpriced equipment.

I love dwarfs. There is basically no other warband I want to play, but, with a pathetic move and everything costing way too much, it is really hard to play competitively. Even trying to offset low movement with range is not very viable because the only ranged weapons we have access to are very expensive and suck. (Im looking at you move or fire) I would kill to have access to a bow.

As has been said above, if the cost for items were balanced people would be more likely to play fluffy options for their warbands, instead of min/maxing just to have a shot at winning.